Robert D. Mariani
How Judge Mariani rules, drawn from 19 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
How Judge Mariani decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
In a habeas case, the court declined to adopt a referral magistrate judge's report and recommendation after de novo review, instead sustaining the state's objections and denying the petition: evidence the court engages independently with a magistrate's reasoning rather than adopting it as a matter of course.
“The Report and Recommendation (Doc. 22) is NOT ADOPTED for the reasons set forth in this Court's memorandum opinion. Respondents' Objections are SUSTAINED to the extent consistent with this Court's memorandum opinion.”
Procedural preferences
The court's own case-management guidance directs that trial dates be set roughly within a year of filing where feasible, requires pre-trial briefs at the pre-trial conference, permits multiple attorneys per party at trial but only one questioning a given witness, and routes settlement discussions in non-jury cases to a magistrate judge or mediator.
“Except in more complex cases, Judge Mariani attempts to schedule a trial date within one year of the filing of the action but the trial date may be earlier, if all parties are amenable.”
On preliminary review, an official's decision to transfer a prisoner into Pennsylvania did not by itself establish the forum-directed contacts needed for personal jurisdiction; when the proper venue was uncertain, the court dismissed that defendant without prejudice rather than select a transferee district.
“Because it is not entirely clear where proper venue may lie, the Court will dismiss the claims against Warden Carlton without prejudice, rather than transfer it to another judicial district.”
Cautions
Pro se prisoner plaintiffs whose civil-rights or disability claims fail to plead a defendant's personal involvement, or who have not exhausted the administrative-remedy process, are dismissed even where the underlying facts are serious: both grounds recur across multiple dismissals.
“Gibson's vague and conclusory allegations fail to satisfy the specific pleading requirements set forth above.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 33) is GRANTED. SUMMARY JUDGMENT IS ENTERED IN FAVOR OF DEFENDANT BARDER AND AGAINST PLAINTIFF WITH PREJUDICE. SUMMARY JUDGMENT IS ENTERED IN FAVOR OF DEFENDANTS STAKE AND ROSE AND AGAINST PLAINTIFF WITHOUT PREJUDICE.”
“For the foregoing reasons, the Court will grant Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment. (Doc. 31). A separate Order follows.”
“The Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 5) is GRANTED. Plaintiff's Complaint is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE AND WITH LEAVE TO AMEND.”
“In sum, Plaintiffs' failed to present evidence from which a reasonable jury could conclude that Defendants' acts or omissions caused Plaintiffs claimed injury. ... the Court concludes that there is no genuine dispute of material fact with respect to causation and will grant Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment in its entirety.”
“For the reasons set forth above, the petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Section 2254 will be denied.”
“The Report and Recommendation (Doc. 22) is NOT ADOPTED for the reasons set forth in this Court's memorandum opinion. Respondents' Objections are SUSTAINED to the extent consistent with this Court's memorandum opinion. The Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Section 2254 (Doc. 1) is DISMISSED.”
“Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 31) is DENIED”
“Secretary's Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (Doc. 34) is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART; The motion is GRANTED as to the FLSA recordkeeping violation ...; The motion is DENIED in all other respects.”
“Based on the foregoing, the Court will deny the motions (Docs. 58, 79, 92, 95) for injunctive relief.”
“Defendant's Motion is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART; The Motion is GRANTED as to Count IV; Count IV of Plaintiffs' Second Amended Complaint (Doc. 21) is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE; The Motion is DENIED as to Count V”
“The R&R (Doc. 11) is ADOPTED for the reasons stated therein. Defendant's Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's Complaint (Doc. 4) is GRANTED. The above-captioned action is DISMISSED.”
“The Court will grant Defendant Dr. Baddick's motion (Doc. 45) to dismiss. A separate Order shall issue.”
“Based on the foregoing, the medical Defendants' motion (Doc. 32) to dismiss will be granted in part and denied in part. A separate Order shall issue.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
- The sampled 2015-2016 civil dockets spanned employment discrimination and civil-rights-jobs claims, ERISA and consumer-credit disputes, ADA immigration-detainee and state-prisoner habeas petitions, a trade-secret and breach-of-contract suit against a former employee, and a municipal Section 1983 suit.
- Several employment and insurance cases resolved through court-annexed mediation or settlement without a contested ruling on the merits, consistent with a civil docket where most cases resolve before judgment.
Draft for Judge Mariani with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Mariani, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Mariani's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace